I think I'm a part of the first generation of journalists to skip print media entirely, and I've learned a lot these last few years at Forbes. My work has appeared on TVOvermind, IGN, and most importantly, a segment on The Colbert Report at one point. Feel free to follow me on Twitter or on Facebook, write me on Facebook or just email at paultassi(at)gmail(dot)com. I'm also almost finished with my sci-fi novel series, The Earthborn Trilogy.

It’s been a well known fact that Joe Biden has been tasked with formulating the Obama administration’s response to the shootings at Sandy Hook, and all the others that have come before it. He’s talking to lawmakers, gun lobbies and one final group that’s raising a few eyebrows, members of the entertainment and video game industry.

There were just whispers that he was doing so until a recent Reuters report confirmed he was in fact meeting with “representatives” of the video game industry. The industry’s inclusion implies that Biden and his task force do hold video games responsible for some part in these killings, or else why include them at all? It’s unclear who exactly these people are he’s meeting with, but it doesn’t really matter.

The simple fact is that the mere idea that the video game industry should be lumped in with the gun industry in crafting a solution for this problem is absurd. And whoever these representatives are? By agreeing to these talks, they’re essentially admitting that video games do have something to do with these tragedies, a belief that almost no one in the industry shares. We have to refuse to accept the idea that there’s even a remote connection between some kid playing Starcraft and his murder of a classroom of kindergartners.

I’m going to skip over the whole video game violence vs. gun violence debate, as we’ve covered that exhaustively already. In short ,the idea that these two are remotely even close to equally responsible for mass shootings is ludicrous, as evidenced by countries like Japan with die-hard gaming populations but nearly zero mass shootings. What they do have? Much more restrictive gun laws, and far fewer firearms.

Rather, I want to try and understand what this conversation between Biden and these representatives would even be like. What exactly is the gaming industry supposed to be doing here?

Here’s my imagined conversation about how this is going to go:

Biden: “Guys, we really need to keep these violent video games out of these young kids’ hands. What do you have for me?”

Video Game Rep: “Well, we have a rating system in place that clearly labels the kind of mature content that comes in each game, along with vastly more detailed explanations online with the ESRB. Nearly all stores refuse to sell Mature rated violent games to anyone under 17, and none even carry Adults Only rated games.”

Biden: “So how are kids getting these games?”

Video Game Rep: “Their parents.”

Biden: “And how many gamers a year go on shooting rampages?

Video Game Rep: “Two or three out of tens of millions.”

Biden: “I think we’re about done here.”

What are the proposed solutions here for getting violent games out of kids’ hands? You could make selling copies of M-rated games to the underage illegal as some states have proposed (and failed to legislate), but it’s already against store policy in nearly every nationwide chain, and employees can get fired for doing so.

You could simply decree that games should be less violent in general, but that’s censorship, plain and simple, and avid defenders of the Second Amendment should also be equally enthusiastic about the first. So what can the game industry do other than explicitly tell parents “you should probably not buy Splatterhouse for your 12 year old.”

But again, we have this false equivalency that keeping video games out of kids hands and keeping guns out of kids hands are equally as important. I understand that it’s not every day you get a call from the Vice President’s office, but those meeting with him should seriously consider how it looks if they agree to be blamed as part of the problem.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Please, NEVER have children, and don’t open your fucking unless you have something actually intelligent to say.

Video games have just barely been around for over 25 years. What about before that? Was Hitler an avid gamer? There is more violence and explicit content in the HOLY BIBLE than even the most “graphic” video game.

Stop trying to grasp at a scapegoat and “explanation” for your own inability to be a good parent or your own shortcomings in being able to teach a child right from wrong, fantasy from reality, and to do the QUINTESSENTIAL thing you are suppose to do as a parent: prepare your child to be a productive member of society.

Do yourself a favor: watch that, and think again before speaking. The people who develop these games, as well as many of the gamers themselves (myself included) are parents. We have children, and we teach them what is real and what isn’t, what is acceptable and what isn’t.

No amount of “virtual violence” is anything like violence in reality. My father was a hunter, and I would go hunting with him since I was no more than 10 years old. When old enough, I would hunt with him. I also served in the Army. I KNOW what real death looks like. Video games are absolutely nothing like it, and if you truly believe they in any way replicate reality, you need psychological evaluation.

So we as an society give the ok to folks running around with military grade hardware (automatic, burst or semie is irrelevant, combat vets know that most fighting is done with single shots) But were gonna attack the entertainment industry???

Nothing is military grade, cause it’s painted black with a rail on it that makes in military grade? I am a vet, and nothing is done with your weapon on Semi. Best weapon in a rifle squad is a 249 SAW. Going to have a hard time picking that up at Walmart, along with any M16 of any variation or a M4, no 203′s or 240 Gulfs to be found.

Most of the rifleman combat is single shot, but most of the rounds fired are full auto.

Single shot would be on a clearing object or on a sweeping engagement. Full frontal assaults are full of auto fire, and most of the M4s and M16s switch to burst at that point for cover fire usage.

The difference between an AR-15 fully decked out and short barrelled to be like an M-4 and a real M4 is huge. And the difference between that and a SAW or a 240-G are light years.

The anti gun crowd needs education, but their emotional arguments block the ability to get that education.

Its like people saying high “Caliber assault weapons” in reference to the AR15. Which fires .223 rounds, a longer version of the .22 LR with a bigger powder casing.

Also, I can think of 5 mixtures in my memory from my Anti-IED Making training that would use standard chemicals to make high explosive and poisonoues weapons. This training was standard for those deployed to Middle East. Thats 2 million vets who may know how to build this stuff. How will you defend against that? Ban Urine? Bleach? Diesel? Aluminum?

Mr. Tassi, in the interest of full disclosure, should probably reveal that he is a video gamer. Hard core, it appears.

I have represented families of victims shot and killed by kids who have trained to do so on hyperviolent video games. I appeared twice on 60 Minutes about these incidents. The Virginia Tech killer trained on CounterStrike, as apparently so did Adam Lanza of Sandy Hook.

Only a total idiot would suggest that violent video games do not cause violence. The American Medical Association and American Psychological Association have found that they do.

Brain scan studies done at Harvard prove that teens process these games in a different part of the brain than do adults, and it is the part of the brain, the mid-brain, that is the seat of emotions of the brain. Trigger the emotions and you trigger shooting scenarios, learned while playing the games. You also, with the games, decrease the resistance to kill. It is called operant conditioning, Mr. Tassi. Ever hear of that?

Our Dept. of Defense uses video games–yes, video games–to break down the inhibition to kill of new recruits and to give them increased killing efficiency. Why would anyone other than Mr. Tassi, or game industry tools like him, think these games would not have this effect upon civilians. Duh.

I am a political conservative, died-in-the-wool defender of the First and Second Amendments and the rest of the Constitution.

But what we have going on here is fraud by corporate entities who continue to market and sell adult-rated video games to minors. The rating is an admission that they are harmful! So it is a legitimate aim to stop the consumption of adult games by kids, just as pornography is not legally sold to minors.

Garbage in, garabage out, Mr. Tassi.

You either don’t have kids and thus don’t know that–that kids replicate what they consume–or you do have kids and your libertarian, business is always right mentality makes you not care about your kids or anyone else who might get in the way of a kid trained to be violent.

I have said on hundreds of college campuses on this issue: Some people believe in original sin, unless it emanates from a corporate boardroom. The problem here at Forbes is that the mindset, which Mr. Tassi expressly transparently, is that if business does it we needn’t be concerned about it.

Quite the contrary. Not a single school shooter has not trained on point and shoot video games to kill.

Just check out Lt. Col. Dave Grossman’s book, On Killing, which was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. He proves the above statement, and he knows of what he speaks as he trains police and soliders to kill.

have shown no conclusive link between video game usage and violent activity.

“Our Dept. of Defense uses video games–yes, video games–to break down the inhibition to kill of new recruits and to give them increased killing efficiency.”

While there are loads of articles that state that the army uses video game tech to train, there is never any mention of using it to”break down inhibition to kill”. Source please.

“The rating is an admission that they are harmful! So it is a legitimate aim to stop the consumption of adult games by kids”

That’s why it’s a rating system. If they’re under 18 they need to have an adult purchase it for them. That’s a parenting failure, not a video game developer conspiracy. There’s a huge demand for adult themed games, are we supposed to censor this specific form of media? For a “died-in-the-wool defender of the First and Second Amendments” you seem to have no problem shredding the former.

“Not a single school shooter has not trained on point and shoot video games to kill”

That’s because 91 percent of children play video games: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20118481-17/91-percent-of-kids-are-gamers-research-says/ With odds like that it’s be weird if a school shooter HADN’T played video games.

In summary your arguments are weak and circumstantial at best. Good luck winning any of those court cases.